[HN Gopher] How to negotiate your salary package
___________________________________________________________________
How to negotiate your salary package
Author : surprisetalk
Score : 173 points
Date : 2025-06-18 22:16 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.complexsystemspodcast.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.complexsystemspodcast.com)
| dtnewman wrote:
| For those who prefer reading, this is more or less an audio
| version of of his essay from years ago:
| https://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/
| davidmurdoch wrote:
| Tangential: What's with the disclaimer about reading on an
| "iDevice"? Do they struggle with lots of words on a single
| page?
| tonfa wrote:
| It's from 2012, mobile device screens were way smaller.
| chgs wrote:
| In 2013 I was buying books on kindle and reading them on my
| 4s just fine
| hiAndrewQuinn wrote:
| This was written over 10 years ago, when such devices had
| much lower resolution.
| Sytten wrote:
| That reads like something written pre LLM, pre mass layoffs and
| pre section 174. Reality is that engineers have way less
| bargaining power that they used to.
|
| Aside, as a small startup I am generally upfront with the salary
| since if you are not in the range we can afford it is not worth
| having a discussion.
| mgraczyk wrote:
| If you have ~5+ years of experience and live in the US, things
| haven't changed. Regardless, negotiating matters more than
| ever.
|
| At startups you negotiate for equity instead of salary but a
| lot of the same advice applies.
| ikiris wrote:
| Startup equity is the equivalent to the old Foxworthy bit
|
| "You can't write me a check?" I said, "No, I -- a check? Hell
| yeah, I can write you a check! I thought you needed money.
| Tell you what, I'm just gonna pay the whole thing off right
| now! I'm gonna be a congressman when I grow up."
| mgraczyk wrote:
| It's not really, because it's finite. You don't generally
| dilute the options pool when you hire new employees, you
| give them some slice of a scarce options pool
| achierius wrote:
| Sure, but there's an extent to which the the board and
| its constitutive shareholders already expect to be giving
| away options for new employees, and as such will have
| allocated a pool for such purpose -- both for the
| "standard" package, and for "hard negotiators". For
| traditional tech startups (i.e. ones not so flush with
| cash as OpenAI), giving these away is far easier than
| giving away more real-world, honest-to-god cashflow,
| because that directly drains your runway, while all
| equity does is make your cap sheet look marginally worse.
| mgraczyk wrote:
| > all equity does is make your cap sheet look marginally
| worse
|
| But at the time the employee is negotiating this has
| already been decided. The company has some valuation and
| you are offering some known percentage of that scarce
| resource. You could argue that the valuation itself is
| the thing being manipulated (which is partially true),
| but that doesn't change the cost of the offer to the
| company in units of equity %
| paulddraper wrote:
| My bank account says otherwise, but it depends.
| ikiris wrote:
| So do all the lottery winners. It doesn't really change
| how a lottery works, or the likely financial result.
| mgraczyk wrote:
| What fraction of lottery participants win, vs startup
| employees? It's rare and there is luck, but the
| quantities matter. You are much more likely to make money
| from a startup and it's much more under your control as
| an employee
| reillyse wrote:
| That's an interesting thought experiment actually.
|
| If you think about the amount of money given up as a
| startup employee you will definitely get some winnings.
|
| For example, say as a startup employee you are
| earning/being compensated 80,000 a year in equity. If you
| bought $80,000 of lottery ticket's each year how much
| would you win. Depends on the lottery but most lottery's
| have a rough payout of approximately 50-70%. Let's say
| it's 50%. So you would expect to receive back $40,000 per
| year.
|
| Do half of all startups equity turn into cash, I think
| not. So probably more likely to make money from the
| lottery.
| paulddraper wrote:
| Less than half of startups have exits...
|
| But most startup people don't work at most startups.
| reillyse wrote:
| I've worked at startups that have had exits and the
| employees got zilch. I think even in the startups with
| exits the probability of an employee having their equity
| turn into cash money is very low (also I doubt 50% of
| startups have exits - I hear a number of 10% more often
| and even that seems high, I'd imagine 10% of YC startups
| have an exit and they are the most likely to succeed so I
| imagine when you add in all the other startups that
| percentage gets far far lower).
| paulddraper wrote:
| Skill issue
| reillyse wrote:
| I thought this was sarcasm initially, but I think on
| looking at the rest of your comments that you are
| actually being serious. wow. Glad I've never had the
| pleasure of working with you.
| mgraczyk wrote:
| You are confusing expected value with probability of
| "winning".
|
| The purpose is to trade EV for a small probability of
| high payout. It's less extreme than the big ticket
| lotteries but more extreme than a scratcher. If that's
| not for you, don't do it
|
| Also your last point is either obviously not true (if
| you're talking about big lottery winnings) or trivially
| true (if you're talking about $1000 scratcher prizes).
| More people made life changing money from a single
| company (Facebook) than all California lottery winners
| combined across all time
| reillyse wrote:
| I think you are confusing how lotteries work, most
| lotteries have additional prizes not just the big grand
| prize. There are a range of prizes.
| mgraczyk wrote:
| Pick a prize amount that is anywhere in the same order of
| magnitude as any engineers total compensation. For any
| such amount, there are more people receiving prizes above
| this amount from startups than lotteries
| reillyse wrote:
| But why can't you win n smaller prizes, money being
| fungible and all we can just tot up the smaller prizes.
| mgraczyk wrote:
| The total number of lottery winners who have won, in
| total, an amount of say 50,000 USD is at least 2 orders
| of magnitude smaller than the number of people who have
| received that amount or more from startup equity
|
| You are making an empirical claim that can be made
| rigorous, it's just off by several orders of magnitude
| reillyse wrote:
| But why are you not including all the people who have
| won.
|
| Surely the calc is, the number of money gambled in
| startup equity versus the amount of money gambled in the
| lottery.
|
| Do startups payout at .5 or above, I think not.
| lazide wrote:
| Most startup gambling is on the form of time.
| reillyse wrote:
| as an aside, I got to reading some lottery winning tips
| (https://www.smartluck.com/free-lottery-tips/california-
| fanta...). A real interesting hodge podge of statistical
| fallacies and other wishful thinkings but at the same
| time it does pull at our brains somehow. Like for example
| even though I know a run of numbers in a row are just as
| likely to happen as any other number I'm really unlikely
| to actually pick it as my guess - I suppose my brain just
| thinks I need some "balance" or the likelihood of this
| pattern happening is low. Randomness is hard.
| paulddraper wrote:
| Of course.
|
| Also...the lottery and startups work very differently.
| coleca wrote:
| Yes, the lottery has rules and governance. It's a much
| safer bet. Startups can decide to devalue their
| employees' shares. I'd venture that the odds are at least
| stated on the back of the ticket with the lottery.
| Employees of privately held startups are often sold a
| dream of future riches that rarely happens. Even where
| there is an exit, often even founding employees get taken
| for a ride.
| danjl wrote:
| Startups also have more non-cash options. E.g. they can offer
| more than 4 weeks of vacation, unlike many enterprise
| companies. As a CEO, when I gave people 6 weeks of real
| vacation, they would never leave, since they cannot get that
| at bigger companies in the US. (We also _stongly_ encouraged
| them to use their vacation, because a healthy work-life
| balance is better for the company.) Startups also have more
| flexibility on WFH, travel options, and other non-cash
| benefits like providing more authority over your schedule and
| tasks. They are typically strapped for cash, unless they are
| not actually startups anymore because they raised $100M, and
| just like the moniker.
| autarch wrote:
| I'm working at a mid-size company, c. 5,500 employees. We
| have unlimited vacation (for US employees). I have taken
| about 6 weeks every year with no issues. I made sure to
| check that this was okay before accepting the offer,
| because unlimited can also mean "no one ever takes
| vacation".
| danjl wrote:
| The problem with unlimited vacation is that the majority
| of engineers never have the guts to ask for it, just like
| they don't know how to negotiate. Unlimited vacation is a
| benefit for the company not the employee. It avoids taxes
| and complications due to carryover constraints.
| autarch wrote:
| To clarify, unlimited vacation is the company policy for
| all US employees. I'm just saying you don't need to work
| at a startup to get 6 weeks PTO.
| Trasmatta wrote:
| Yeah, as someone with 10+ YOE, there seem to be tons of
| opportunities with good packages right now. Companies still
| seem to need lots of senior devs: the market looks much much
| harder for anyone with less experience right now
| 0x5f3759df-i wrote:
| Maybe if you have 5+ years experience at FAANG or something.
|
| I have 5+ years experience at a no name place and can't even
| get an interview anywhere. Maybe my resume is shit but I've
| tried many different versions with no luck in the last 4-5
| months.
| mgraczyk wrote:
| You may want to try moving to the bay area or NYC for a few
| years if you're not already in one of those places. It's
| much easier to get a good job, then you can move away after
| you have the "right" experience. Also follow the advice in
| the article, in particular find people you want to work for
| and DM them
| braden-lk wrote:
| There's been this vein of advice from the past decade
| that's in the realm of "just work at FAANG". Always rubbed
| me the wrong way; they make it sound so easy, lol. The
| couple of interviews I managed to get after hundreds of
| ghostings, I was absolutely demolished in the interviews.
| It seems like if you get nervous doing math problems in
| front of people who really don't want to be there (and tell
| you to your face), you don't get to work at FAANG.
|
| Just started my own business instead.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Clearly the advice can't be for the literal 50th
| percentile HN reader in 2025... because nowadays there
| are hundreds of thousands of readers.
|
| And all the FAANG combined probably don't even have half
| that many positions, with negotiable salaries, in total
| worldwide.
| rsanek wrote:
| i mean, even if we only include Apple Microsoft and
| Google you're already up to more than half a million
| employees
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Are you confused about the comment?
|
| The majority of positions at any of these (except maybe
| Netflix) are not hired through negotiable salary packages
| of the types relevant to the post. I never said anything
| about overall employee count.
| marcinzm wrote:
| Theres a difference between something being easy, and
| something being achievable given a large investment of
| time and effort. FAANG is the second. Not for everyone
| but if you have anxiety then practice, therapy and
| possibly prescribed medications for anxiety. I'm sure
| there whole groups of people who mutually pair mock
| interview to get over anxiety like this. Or that you can
| pay to interview you.
| braden-lk wrote:
| Totally; and big respect to the people who put in
| hundreds of hours of prep. I did leetcode, practice
| interviews, 4.0 gpa, all that. I think the big hang up
| for me was, no matter how many practice interviews I did,
| there were only 4 real ones, with long waiting periods
| between attempts. And honestly... 3/4 my FAANG
| interviewers were really rude/late/apathetic. I actually
| did make it to second round at Google on the third try,
| but at that point I was so exhausted with the process, I
| took an offer from a company that at least pretended to
| give a shit whether I joined them or not. Had a wonderful
| 3 years there building green-field B2C products.
|
| Getting some work experience and then starting my own
| thing was a better fit for me.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Only consider equity if there is actually a market value for
| it. Early stage startups hand out equity options that likely
| will not ever be worth anything.
| have-a-break wrote:
| Honestly at work LLMs seemed to make me less productive. For
| side projects they help but I've seen papers indicating this is
| the case for industry.
|
| We as engineers have let the recruiters and VC funding
| brainwash us into lower salaries. Kind of looking forward to a
| rebound.
| rednafi wrote:
| This is my experience too. All these LLMs and agents are
| great for bootstrapping projects faster than ever. They help
| immensely with bringing down the activation energy. So I do a
| lot more tinkering around in multiple languages that I
| wouldn't have otherwise.
|
| That said, once the project goes beyond a certain threshold,
| LLMs offer little more than a highly capable autocomplete. In
| larger codebases, the current context window is too small for
| the tools to even answer questions properly, let alone make
| any non-trivial changes.
|
| Productivity starts going down once you try to use LLMs in a
| large codebase and expect them to be as helpful as they were
| in a smaller one. Often, these authoritative little shits
| will whirl you around in a doom loop and still won't find any
| useful solution. And suddenly you find yourself having to
| clean up the mess.
|
| I'd still say the productivity benefit is positive, but at
| the same time, the hype around these is bonkers. Employers
| are holding onto the hype cycle to bring down wages through
| FUD.
| bluefirebrand wrote:
| > LLMs offer little more than a highly capable autocomplete
|
| I find LLM autocomplete extremely annoying compared to
| traditional intellisense
|
| It is wrong _way_ more and I don 't want multi-line
| autocomplete, it's too intrusive
| GardenLetter27 wrote:
| Are you using Copilot or Cursor? I find Cursor's one
| pretty good. Although they just butchered their pricing
| :(
| casualscience wrote:
| You need to setup the problem for the llm. If I am getting
| an error, I can normally piece together the 10k lines of
| relevant code much more quickly than I can track down the
| bug.
|
| Llms are still a big speed boost there
| roncesvalles wrote:
| If you see an error and can't immediately Cmd+Shift+F an
| error code or something and jump to the exact line of
| code that threw the error, that's an engineering problem.
| roncesvalles wrote:
| >Productivity starts going down once you try to use LLMs in
| a large codebase and expect them to be as helpful as they
| were in a smaller one.
|
| Exactly this. I've really tried to find use for LLMs in my
| big tech company SWE job and I just can't. The context is
| just too large, and not just the code context. In the time
| that I can "explain" everything to the LLM, keep iterating
| until it spits out something semi-useful and massage that
| into something I can merge, I'd rather just do the whole
| thing myself.
|
| But it's amazing for greenfield personal projects.
| JonChesterfield wrote:
| I'm decently excited about the new world of hugely increased
| quantity of terrible code. Not absolutely sure how to go
| mining yet but it has opportunity written all over it.
| peab wrote:
| that's because it was written in 2012! The original essay is
| here: https://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/
| (Originally written: January 23, 2012)
| onion2k wrote:
| 2012! is a very long way in the future.
| dakiol wrote:
| > Reality is that engineers have way less bargaining power that
| they used to
|
| There is negotation power but only if you pass all the
| interview challenges. Only at that point you are in a position
| to name your number (of course you won't ask $500K when you
| know the company you are applying to pays around $200K...
| because you have done your previous research on that; you'll
| ask something between $200K and $250K and see how they react).
| Layoffs and AI hasn't change this (sure, thing, 5 years ago
| companies were hiring more and perhaps were more relaxed about
| this, but that didn't change the fact that you can only
| negotiate when they want you)
| buttocks wrote:
| Life was good for engineers 15 years ago!
| grepLeigh wrote:
| It still is! I think getting your foot in the door is much more
| difficult now compared to 5-6 years ago, similar to difficulty
| finding entry level work in 2008-2009 financial crisis.
|
| Market conditions aside, the points the OP blog post makes
| about asymmetrical value are evergreen.
| dan-robertson wrote:
| Ok, but also engineers in the US are much better paid now than
| 15 years ago. In 2010 the big story in engineer comp was that
| Google, Apple, and others were conspiring to avoid competing
| for talent (and thereby driving pay up) [1]. It was roughly
| Facebook not being part of this scheme that started driving
| salaries up. A few years ago the popular story was that people
| were switching jobs because their compensation had been
| inflated by massive share price increases (ie you are promised
| x shares vesting over 4 years at sign on with refresher grants,
| but the value of x shares goes up a bunch over those years) and
| they wanted to maintain their high realised comp even though
| shares were no longer rising as much. The only way for that to
| happen was engineers getting paid very well.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-
| Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
| Drblessing wrote:
| Ask for $100,000,000
| cornhole wrote:
| I just ask some stupid amount of money first because there is
| literally no cost or downsides.
| testfrequency wrote:
| I can tell you that most hiring managers and recruiters find it
| offensive, and the conversation quickly shifts to how much do
| we care about playing games with this candidate who seems a bit
| reckless in suggesting a salary they know isn't realistic.
| baxuz wrote:
| I find it offensive and playing games when they won't give me
| the ranges.
|
| I've been at companies which paid me 1/2 of what some my
| peers earned. I don't have time for these games. Give me your
| salary ranges for the position and I can negotiate. Otherwise
| I'm pulling numbers out of my ass.
|
| The recruiter wants to pay me as close to 0 as possible, and
| it's up to me to push back on that.
| cornhole wrote:
| hiring managers and recruiters are not people so its ok
| k__ wrote:
| Yeah.
|
| The only good jobs I got directly from CEOs.
| nrclark wrote:
| When talking with recruiters, I usually decline to state the
| first number politely - saying something like "salary isn't the
| only reason why I'd take a job, and I always look at the whole
| package as well as the role. I'm sure your offer will be
| competitive."
|
| On forms where I have to put a range, I put $1.00.
| moralestapia wrote:
| How do you negotiate when the position already has a fixed number
| in there that was even published along the job description?
| sokoloff wrote:
| If there's a single fixed number (rather than a range), there's
| probably a reason for that (might be a government, university,
| or institute role with a fixed pay schedule, for example) and
| as a hiring manager, I'm assuming you're applying for the job
| as published, including the comp number.
| throwaway219450 wrote:
| Let's assume the amount is fixed. One approach is to ask to re-
| frame the position to be better value.
|
| Ask for working hours that effectively pays you more per day,
| like an 80% contract at the same comp. If they mumble HR and
| hours, offer to do 4x10 hour days. The magic phrase in
| corporate is "flexible working". This doesn't solve your comp
| going up, but you get a 3-day weekend and 52 more holidays a
| year.
|
| This one even works at intensely bureaucratic organisations
| like universities. With grants, the amount you can be paid is
| very fixed, but almost anything else can be approved if three
| people sign off on it.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Patrick's "salary negotiation" piece has made the rounds here a
| number of times, and I always have the same reaction to it: It
| probably works, _if you are already_ a software celebrity like
| Patrick, or some other highly sought after Captain of the
| software engineering industry. For us rank-and-file employee
| number 12887 's, I just don't see it working--I've really never
| negotiated compensation significantly successfully in my 25+ year
| career. Here's how salary negotiation usually goes if you're not
| someone like John Carmack:
|
| Them: We'd love to have you join the team! Here's your
| compensation letter, please get back to us within the next 2
| weeks and we'll move forward.
|
| You: Thank you, I believe my background and skills would suggest
| a compensation of $1.5X instead of $X. Is this possible with your
| hiring budget?
|
| Them: The offer is for $X and we believe it is appropriate for
| your level.
|
| You: Maybe my level should be higher then?
|
| Them: Ha Ha
|
| You: Looking at [website A, B, C] I see the average compensation
| for this role is $1.25X. Surely there is room to move this
| upward.
|
| Them: We don't agree with that data. The offer is for $X. Shall
| we move forward?
|
| You: What about equity or bonus, is there any flexibility with
| those numbers, or vacation time, or...?
|
| Them: The offer is for $X. If you don't want the job, we can move
| on to one of our other 20 candidates who are in the pipeline for
| the role.
|
| That's basically how salary negotiations went for almost the
| entirety of my career. If your results have been different, I'm
| kind of envious!
| sokoloff wrote:
| If you don't have a strong BATNA (Best Alternative to a
| Negotiated Agreement), you're not going to get very far with
| just asking.
|
| "I received your offer for $X. I really enjoyed the interviews,
| meeting the team, and am intrigued by the problems I'd get to
| solve with them. Unfortunately, I have a competing offer for
| $1.25X from another company and I need to make sure my family
| is provided for. If you would match it, I'm excited to join,
| but if your offer is firm at $X, I'm afraid I won't be taking
| it."
|
| If they really just need someone to hold down a chair, they'll
| probably not budge. If they really want specifically you,
| they're more likely to bend if they believe that's their only
| move.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Basically correct. I guess my point is Patrick could have
| saved a lot of typing and simply wrote "Have one or more
| competing offers."
| jt2190 wrote:
| Do you consider yourself an _excellent_ negotiator already?
| It really feels like you're trying to suggest that
| negotiation can't ever work for anyone except a handful of
| celebrities, even for those who are excellent negotiators.
|
| Someone's already asking about your BATNA, and I'm
| wondering if you negotiate all benefits (amount of time off
| for example) since your story focused on salary alone.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Based on my results, I am clearly not a skilled
| negotiator! I have found most companies to be inflexible
| around everything, from salary to equity to vacation time
| to health benefits to 401(k). The package is what it is,
| and if you don't want to take it, you can leave it.
| lazide wrote:
| Sure, because you personally aren't in a place you can
| just leave it.
|
| If you don't have a good competing alternative
| offer/option, you're not negotiating, you're begging.
|
| And chances are, _they_ have alternatives.
| jt2190 wrote:
| Interesting. I think there's definitely a "meta-game"
| that negotiation requires you to prepare in advance if
| you want success. For example, knowing if the job opening
| is in a "cost center" or "revenue center" for the
| company, or how the job is funded. Clearly a well-funded
| department can offer more salary, and a revenue
| increasing job can pay more than a cost-savings one,
| since revenue has no upper bound and savings is bounded.
| Companies that have high revenue per developer can pay
| more in general. Companies that have to compete globally
| for talent have pay more than those that only have to
| compete in a local market. I can go on but you get the
| idea.
| danjl wrote:
| We're you willing to walk away if you didn't get what you
| wanted? Or were you just hoping they would capitulate?
| IMHO, The key to negotiating is knowing where your red
| line is, and being willing to walk away if you don't
| reach it.
| systemf_omega wrote:
| I can imagine many people's view of negotiation is asking
| "Can I have X" and when they get rejected just moving on
| with "Ok that's fine".
| sokoloff wrote:
| As a hiring manager and someone who's an employee rep on
| the 401k committee, I can't even imagine _how_ I could
| customize the 401k for an individual candidate. I think
| the same is true for health insurance.
|
| If someone came with that request, I'd probably be amused
| but I doubt I could change anything.
| k__ wrote:
| I mean, they don't know AND you only need one "yes"...
| atrettel wrote:
| In my experience, some employers don't even care if you
| have a competing offer. They will change nothing. I've
| written about this before [1]. To me, the best thing about
| having multiple offers is that you can at least make a
| choice.
|
| [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43598192
| zem wrote:
| honestly I have no problem with that if they are firm
| about not negotiating - I actually respect that stance
| greatly and see it as a green flag. it just bothers me if
| I am shortchanging myself working somewhere that other
| people have successfully negotiated higher salaries for
| and I have not.
| aianus wrote:
| This just means you'll be working with people that had no
| other option. Massive red flag.
| zem wrote:
| or that i'll be working with people who also appreciate a
| culture where your salary is not based on your
| negotiation skills, and you don't have to worry about
| making less than someone doing the same job as you simply
| because you were less convincing or had less leverage
| when you joined.
| esseph wrote:
| Seems like a fight against reality
| roncesvalles wrote:
| In my experience, the proclivity of a company to negotiate
| entirely depends on how quickly they need to hire someone.
| If the requirement is to scale up immediately, once at the
| offer stage you're the fastest person on the planet who can
| start working in the role, and this gives you significant
| leverage.
|
| If the company can afford to onboard someone any time in
| the next few months, they don't need to negotiate. They
| just need to keep the pipeline flowing until some candidate
| accepts their lowball number.
| pcl wrote:
| I don't get the impression that his brand is based on
| conciseness.
| whiplash451 wrote:
| > If they really just need someone to hold down a chair
|
| I would not jump to this conclusion. The company might have a
| very deliberate compensation strategy. Giving $Y instead of
| $X to a newcomer at a given level without aligning other
| people at the same level to $Y raises serious concerns.
|
| As a company, you don't _have to_ let yourself bullied by
| other companies.
| sokoloff wrote:
| Agreed. If they just need a chair spring compressed, they
| won't budge. That doesn't mean if they don't budge that
| they just need the spring compressed.
|
| P implies Q doesn't necessitate Q implies P.
| octo888 wrote:
| "rank-and-file employee number 12887"s don't tend to find it
| easy to get multiple job offers at once to use as leverage !
| Even more so in today's climate
| zem wrote:
| pretty much, my first bigco job I made the mistake of only
| applying to the one place (had a job already, was looking for
| a change but without any urgency), and they would not budge
| on salary, just said the offer was already very generous and
| at the top of their salary band for my level. the next time I
| was job hunting I had just been laid off and so was
| frantically applying to a lot of places, ended up getting
| several offers and that definitely made a difference (though
| interestingly enough no one was willing to negotiate on base
| pay, but they would on things like stock and signing bonuses)
| entropi wrote:
| Last time I got a job offer the hiring process took ~4 months
| with seven steps, and I had to answer within 3 days.
|
| I do not get how is anyone realistically supposed to coincide
| the multiple offers they get. Unless you are already in an
| extremely privileged position, I cannot even imagine how you
| can do that.
| rsanek wrote:
| you tell everyone up front what your timeline is, months
| ahead of time. that way, all of them coincide and you get
| maximum leverage.
|
| last job search i got 4 offers to line up that i could use
| in negotiations.
| sokoloff wrote:
| If you're applying to Google, apply to them _way ahead_ of
| the others...
| Magmalgebra wrote:
| > I had to answer within 3 days.
|
| If you re-read the transcript, I hope you will come to the
| understanding that this is a lie. The company is trying to
| leverage your desperation for a job.
|
| > Last time I got a job offer the hiring process took ~4
| months with seven steps
|
| Just like increased compensation, gettting the timeline you
| want requires leverage. When interviewing I always
| communicate that I expect an offer from a peer competitor
| within the next few weeks - this expedies my interview
| process. I always end up with a minimum of 4 competing
| offers to use as a BATNA.
|
| Something the article winks at here is that negotation has
| only a small expected payoff if you've navigated your
| career such that you're a "small fish in a big pond" so to
| speak.
|
| Someone who can barely pass a FAANG interview likely can't
| negotiate much with Google but probably could negotiate at
| lower tier company like SAP.
|
| *edit* I do this strategy 12-18 months whether or not I
| leave a company, it has never failed me
| flatline wrote:
| This was the standard advice 2-3 years ago when the
| market was hot, I can't imagine this being feasible for
| most people right now.
| Magmalgebra wrote:
| This has never stopped working for me - I interview every
| year or so as a matter of course.
|
| My experience helping others is that in a tightening
| labor market they are experiencing "small fish in a big
| pond" syndrome mentioned above.
|
| Compensation for the bottom 50-75% of talent has dropped
| significantly since 2021* - if you are in that band and
| chasing the same comp you're dealing with the "small fish
| in a big pond" situation. If these people drop their
| compensation expectations back to 2017 levels many of
| them will find jobs much more plentiful - though the very
| bottom of the pool is being driven out of the industry
| entirely.
|
| * this estimate pulled from conversations with
| engineering leaders and recruiters at large SV tech
| companies
| scarface_74 wrote:
| Post 2022, there are hundreds of people applying for
| every job and they can easily find someone good enough to
| fill the position.
|
| Have you tried your strategy in the last 2-3 years?
| Magmalgebra wrote:
| I have - it works.
|
| I can also assure you that despite the 100s of applicants
| hiring remains hard even with competitive market
| compensation. Filling a generalist senior eng headcount
| with $500k liquid total compensation can take months.
| Many engineers have wildly inflated ideas about their own
| abilities.
| bigs wrote:
| It happened for me once by pure chance.
|
| I was looking to leave a secondment I was on, and received
| an offer, right as the leader of the client I was seconded
| to said we'd like to take you on permanently and we've
| cleared it with your company, here's the offer. I used that
| as leverage and left.
|
| Otherwise, I agree, it's a snowball chance in hell to
| coincide them.
| jayd16 wrote:
| Do the alternative offers need to actually be real? They
| just need to be realistic, no?
| sokoloff wrote:
| They just have to be real enough for you to convince them
| you're not taking their offer. That risks you having to
| not take their offer, of course.
| lnsru wrote:
| I am the 12887 too. Luckily applied at the place in emergency
| mode and was perfect fit. Negotiated +6%. Yeah! In the second
| year it was reduced by 3% coupling my bonus to unachievable
| goals. As someone wrote on HN: it is not their first rodeo. HR
| knows how to attract and get to the right salary level
| afterwards. What can I do? Swallowing is the only way. There
| are no job ads in my area.
| marcinzm wrote:
| You still got 3% in a market that's not in your favor. And
| likely you'd have had -3% otherwise and not 0%.
| Lu2025 wrote:
| How about extra vacation time? Does anyone have experience
| getting it when asked (and actually being able to take that
| time off)?
| wrsh07 wrote:
| I expect this is one where if you're coming from an Etsy or
| Google that gives 5 weeks after 5 years of tenure you could
| negotiate for preservation of that perk, but it seems like
| it could be challenging depending on your batna (see
| definition elsewhere in comments)
| jandrewrogers wrote:
| Yes, I once added two extra weeks of vacation time.
| lostlogin wrote:
| > HR knows how to attract and get to the right salary level
| afterwards.
|
| This has to be the key point. They do this all the time as
| part of their job. You do it every few years, or maybe every
| decade. Of course they are better at it.
| whiplash451 wrote:
| You indeed have little to no leverage if you don't have a
| better offer elsewhere.
|
| Was true in 2012, remains true today.
| Ifkaluva wrote:
| In my experience the only thing that works is competing offers.
| acrooks wrote:
| There are two fundamental ways to win a negotiation. By "win",
| I mean achieve an outcome outside the norm, such as an above
| market rate salary.
|
| 1. Negotiate from a position of strength
|
| You pointed out a couple of these, like when you have a strong
| personal brand (like Patrick) or when the market dynamics
| favour employees. The former is not something you can control
| so, when the market is in this place, you should take advantage
| of it to propel yourself. However, the former is completely
| within your control. You can spend some time and effort
| building a personal brand. Many people discount the value of a
| brand and the effort spent building one, but it totally works.
| I have marketing-savvy friends who, since early in their career
| as juniors, spent a lot of time on LinkedIn thought leadership
| & brand building. And it totally works. In fact, I have one
| such friend who was recently part of a restructuring layoff
| (i.e., not related to performance). Because of the brand they
| built, once they posted about the layoff on LinkedIn, they had
| 12 offers within a week all higher than their previous salary.
|
| Another area where you can gain leverage is when you already
| work at a company that wants to retain you. The only time a
| business will bend over backwards for an employee is when the
| conversation is about retention. To make the conversation about
| retention you need to be completely willing to walk, and your
| negotiating position is strengthened if you have counter
| offers. To maintain your political capital (which will be
| important if you stay) you need to be careful about how you
| play this game. I've worked with people in the past who
| approached the business confrontationally, saying "if you don't
| give me $X, I quit" - that strategy only works once. But there
| are ways to structure this conversation where you don't leave a
| bad taste in anybody's mouth.
|
| 2. Care about something different than your counterpart
|
| Often the person you're negotiating with cares the most about
| optimising certain metrics. You should try to spend some time
| figuring out what those metrics are and see if there is
| something different that makes a difference in your life.
|
| e.g., your employer might be really under the gun about
| managing fixed salaries. This is very common in a lot of
| businesses to try to manage their headcount. So they might be
| more willing to give you a $50k cash bonus compared to a $25k
| salary increase. Or maybe they're more open to an extra week or
| two of vacation vs. salary.
|
| This phenomenon has been really helpful for me in the last
| year. I run my own business, but my business is fully
| bootstrapped, so I don't have a board or any investors to
| please. As a result, I'm not as motivated by ARR as other SaaS
| companies. Sometimes I encounter customers who would rather pay
| me a 3-4x one-time fee instead of ARR. By making these deals I
| immediately guarantee what would have otherwise been four years
| of cash (potentially with a cancellation risk during the term).
| A VC-funded SaaS business would almost never make a deal like
| this, because such a deal would not have a material impact on
| valuation.
|
| Another example - I was moving recently and sold some
| furniture. I was chatting with somebody who was an optometrist
| who wanted to buy a few things, which I listed at $200. They
| offered $100. I countered, asking for the right to use their
| employee discount, and ended up getting $500 in value.
|
| So you should also spend some time trying to figure out what
| your negotiation counterpart cares about. Maybe there is an
| arbitrage where you can both get exactly what you want, instead
| of needing to find an outcome where one person wins and the
| other one loses.
| smokel wrote:
| Why would one negotiate on a few hundred dollars when they're
| apparently capable of negotiating deals worth hundreds of
| thousands? In my opinion, the marginal benefit does not
| outweigh the potential downside of being perceived as petty.
|
| The only reasonable conclusion I can draw is that they simply
| enjoy the negotiation process itself. I guess most of us do
| not.
| acrooks wrote:
| That's an interesting question. I think there are a couple
| of points here.
|
| So, more broadly, you might be asking me "why waste your
| time selling $100s of furniture?" which is a completely
| fair question. The opportunity cost of the time spent
| selling it was far greater than the benefit I got. From a
| pure optimization perspective it was a bad use of my time.
|
| But also I just moved to the other side of the world and
| had an apartment filled with furniture that I needed to get
| rid of. And I am the type of person who doesn't like waste,
| so sending everything to the landfill was misaligned with
| my personal values. And also I don't work 24 hours per day,
| so it's not like this effort takes tome away from working
| on the meaningful deals.
|
| It would be reasonable to ask "why not give it away for
| free?" In my experience, customers that pay you nothing are
| a much bigger burden than customers that pay you something
| (and, in fact, I find that higher revenue customers are
| much easier to deal with on an absolute basis).
|
| And then your more direct question: why negotiate at all?
| Why not just accept the offer and move on with your life? I
| think your guess is correct: I am a negotiator at heart. I
| really truly love the hustle, in all aspects of life. It
| doesn't matter whether I'm earning $10, $1000 or $100k: I
| love making deals. And this part of my character is
| probably a big part of why I've been successful in
| business.
|
| To your final point - the marginal benefit of negotiating
| vs. being perceived as petty. In all of these situations
| the audience is different and their lifetime value is
| different. It would be foolish to negotiate with a $100k
| customer over $100s; you're right to assume that the
| customer might perceive it as petty (and such a move would
| probably diminish their lifetime value). But, on the other
| hand, if you sold something to a random person off
| Craigslist where their expected lifetime value was in the
| $100s wouldn't it be foolish to not try to maximize your
| outcome, especially if it only added a minute or two to the
| transaction?
| setheron wrote:
| If you say a number, even 1.5x you've already lost. Replying
| with either yes (accept) or no are the only two responses that
| work.
| shepherdjerred wrote:
| I didn't try to negotiate my first job (I was just happy to be
| employed, especially at AWS)
|
| My two jobs since I've been able to get more by... just asking
| for more, even without competing offers.
| whatshisface wrote:
| You really have one option per scenario over a total of two
| scenarios as #12887, and they are "yes I will take this job,"
| and "if you want me to leave my present employer, you would
| have to offer more than my current salary."
| systemf_omega wrote:
| You don't have to be a star programmer, fame isn't the only
| form of leverage.
|
| If you're in demand, and you're good at what you do, the road
| is paved for you. Top companies have already set the bar.
|
| Them: we offer 250k-350k
|
| Me: I don't consider anything below 500
|
| The answers I get vary. Some tell me to politely fvck off. Some
| tell me they need to discuss with leadership. Some just go for
| it because they know how hard it is to fill that role.
|
| The justification is simple: why would I take a job with you if
| I can land an HFT gig at twice the pay?
| dcsan wrote:
| You had me until HFT...
| systemf_omega wrote:
| Doesn't have to be finance. AI can pay just as well. Tech
| too depending on seniority.
| deadbabe wrote:
| The proliferation of AI and LLMs has completely obliterated
| leverage.
|
| Don't want the job for the salary offered? Too bad. Hire a
| cheaper person armed to the teeth with the best LLM coding
| tools and move on.
|
| Unless you're coming in with significant clout that will move
| revenue and relations to bridge partnerships across other
| companies, you will not be worth the extra $250k on skills
| alone.
| systemf_omega wrote:
| That's what bottom-tier companies always tell me. Last
| decade it used to be outsourcing. I was getting low balled
| left and right with phrases like "I can pay a guy from Asia
| a lot less for the same work".
|
| Now it's LLMs. Same old.
| deadbabe wrote:
| Except now it's for _real_.
| lazide wrote:
| Outsourcing was and is real too. It had and still does
| have tradeoffs.
|
| LLM's have similar if not worse trade offs imo.
| Magmalgebra wrote:
| This is situational - as a strong engineer I have more
| leverage than ever to demand ever more eye watering
| compensation.
|
| Weaker engineers and junior engineers are in more the
| situation you describe. This is tough and I feel for these
| folks but it is possible for many people to become stronger
| engineers if they choose to put in the work.
|
| I'd encourage you to not take on a feeling of hopelessness
| here.
| ipdashc wrote:
| > You don't have to be a star programmer
|
| > 250k-350k
|
| > land an HFT gig
|
| Respectfully, your perspective may be a bit skewed? OP's
| context was "us rank-and-file employee number 12887's".
| systemf_omega wrote:
| Many people working in these companies are as rank-and-file
| as it gets. Non existent public profile, no open source
| contributions, no flashy portfolio.
|
| Not really in the same category as Carmack
| itronitron wrote:
| I'm curious what your thoughts are on the "salary expectations"
| question in the initial phone screen or first stage. In my
| experience, I have never been asked that question _and then_
| moved onto the next step in the process, regardless of whether
| or how I answer the question.
|
| So I am left thinking they are just collecting salary metrics
| for the position.
| whiplash451 wrote:
| Never (ever) respond to this question early in the process.
| The company is just collecting market data.
|
| Tell them that the salary should be negotiated at the end if
| the process is successful.
|
| If they tell you "but we need this to make sure we're not
| wasting your time and ours", tell them "well give me a range
| for what you can do and I'll tell you if you're wasting my
| time"
| wrsh07 wrote:
| I actually strongly disagree with this take and
|
| 1) after reading the original post immediately linked it to a
| friend who had an outstanding offer. She got a significant
| raise from fairly light negotiating
|
| 2) personally, I don't think of myself as a particularly
| aggressive negotiator. However, I have been able to truthfully
| discuss compensation using the tactics described with
| recruiters to get leveling and comp where I've wanted it to be
| for my last couple of jobs. Yes, I always had multiple offers.
| That's part of negotiating.
|
| More generally, though, I think spending 30+ minutes (reading
| the piece and more) thinking about negotiating has helped me
| build a better mental model for what to bring to the table.
| whiplash451 wrote:
| > She got a significant raise from fairly light negotiating
|
| Either she had a competing offer, or the company she is
| interviewing for has weak processes. A company yielding "a
| significant raise from fairly light negotiating" is very
| worrying IMO.
|
| Think about it: what does that tell you about the next
| newcomer that will come after you?
| wrsh07 wrote:
| It was a different era, she was a particularly strong
| candidate and they had given a low-ball offer. I don't
| think she had a competing offer fwiw
|
| (Less process is normal at smaller orgs, so that's also
| something to consider)
| tptacek wrote:
| This could not be less true and I really wish people would stop
| spreading this idea, because it's costing other people lots of
| money. In fact, the Venn diagram mapping "software celebrities"
| like Patrick and expert negotiators has not much overlap at
| all. You've never heard of some of the best-compensated
| developers I know (and they don't work on "celebrity" projects,
| either); meanwhile, I can think of multiple "celebrities" who
| have gotten extremely raw deals --- one, for instance, was
| brought in to lead engineering & R&D at a security company
| working against organized crime, and didn't even get any
| equity.
|
| Patrick is right: compensation is much more about negotiating
| skill than it is about reputation or (especially) notoriety,
| holding everything else equal.
| closeparen wrote:
| L5 at FAANG and adjacent companies (Airbnb, Uber, Stripe,
| Block, Databricks, etc) is a rank and file, employee number
| 12887 rule. Yet it is compensated in the mid six figures, and
| the ranges are easily more than $100k wide. Position in the
| range depends on a number of factors, famously stock market
| timing is a big one, but competing offers and negotiation are
| certainly in there.
| psanford wrote:
| One of the key points to patio11's article is that there is
| only upside to negotiation with no downside. You are basically
| saying: negotiation doesn't work so why bother. Please stop.
|
| I once negotiated a large raise at a job where afterwards my
| boss told me that he could not have justified giving me that
| raise on his own, but because I asked for it he was able to
| make the case.
|
| Negotiating often works. It has no downside for you (besides
| making you feel uncomfortable) and major upsides that last well
| beyond your current role.
| spike021 wrote:
| the people who can negotiate, especially when changing jobs,
| are almost always the ones who can get multiple offers.
|
| i'm usually lucky if i can get one offer when interviewing. no
| room to negotiate that way...
| jstummbillig wrote:
| I would find this less confusing of a top comment, if it did
| not ignore vital information and advice that already is in
| Patricks piece (and apparently ignored, even after having seen
| it "a number of times"?). To anyone agreeing with this
| position, I would recommend giving it another read.
|
| Which is not to say that this advice must lead to a raise for
| everyone who reads it, but if your current assessment of the
| piece is "this only works for super stars" then you have
| definitely not really ingested the ideas offered (but you might
| be making excuses for why that is).
| dan-robertson wrote:
| Maybe this is a stupid question, but it wasn't clear to me
| reading your comment: how many times did you attempt
| negotiation and have it fail in roughly the way you describe?
| xondono wrote:
| I'm hardly a "Captain", and I've successfully negotiated salary
| increases several times.
|
| The only thing you need is leverage, and yes, rank-and-file are
| not going to have a lot of leverage at a FAANG.
|
| You can't negotiate if you're not willing to let the job go
| through.
| scarface_74 wrote:
| I'm not a captain of industry by any means but I'm very
| credentialed in my niche of AWS cloud consulting specializing
| in app development since 2023 - 7 years of experience, 3.5
| years working at AWS (Professional Services) open source
| contributions and a major contributor to popular official open
| source "AWS Solutions" in a certain niche - and I was not able
| to negotiate more than 5-10% for certain opportunities and some
| I couldn't push them for more money at all.
|
| My comp is good for non FAANG especially seeing that I work
| remotely in a non HCOL no state tax city. But it's hard for
| normies to do significant negotiations. I also have "unlimited
| PTO" and fully plan to take 20-25 days at least.
| teaearlgraycold wrote:
| I have _never_ not successfully negotiated a comp over up since
| I was 19. Even for college jobs I'd at least get an extra $1
| /hr. The rest vary from small bumps up $50k extra from Google
| without a competing offer.
|
| Maybe we're just living in different worlds.
| joshuacc wrote:
| I'm not a celebrity or superstar, and I've successfully used
| his techniques several times. The very first time it resulted
| in $20k improvement over the initial salary offer. Another time
| it resulted in an additional $40k in signing bonus.
|
| Most recently it resulted in a modest $5k boost to the offered
| salary.
|
| But the level of success you are likely to experience entirely
| depends on the alternatives that you have and the alternatives
| they have.
|
| (I should also note that I've never been located anywhere like
| SF.)
| g9yuayon wrote:
| That's why Patrick said it helps to have a strong reputation
| going in. Still, you can absolutely negotiate--just make sure
| you have real leverage. That usually means a competing offer
| from another solid company (ideally a competitor).
|
| Keep this in mind: it's really hard for companies to hire good
| engineers. The onsite-to-offer ratio might be 20:1 or worse. So
| when a recruiter says they'll just move on to the next
| candidate, they're probably bluffing.
|
| But what if they do have 20 people lined up? Then you don't
| have leverage with that company--and that's fine. Take the
| offer if it's good enough, or walk and try elsewhere.
|
| P.S., a fun anecdote: when Netflix was extending an offer to a
| renowned engineer, he brought his PR to negotiate. Apparently,
| it worked well for him.
|
| P.P.S, always interview for a higher title. I get it -- it's
| tough with hot companies like OpenAI. But for most places, it's
| worth a shot. At the very least, don't aim lower than your
| current level. It's funny how the human mind works--
| interviewers anchor their expectations to your title. And
| ironically, a senior engineer interview is often just as hard
| as a staff-level one. If you're feeling cynical, just remember:
| title inflation is real and everywhere, and plenty of high-
| level ICs are great at navigating politics, drawing boxes, and
| sounding confident, but not necessarily skilled at offering
| real values like solving hard engineering problems. So if you
| can't beat the game, why not play it?
| whiplash451 wrote:
| The main thing that changed since when this article was written
| is that companies are _much less_ in a rush than they used to to
| hire people, which means that a lot of mechanics described in the
| article fall apart.
|
| In particular, companies don't really look at how much they spend
| to hire someone. They'll just wait for the hiring committee to be
| "really excited" about a candidate before making an offer.
| andy99 wrote:
| I regularly exchange currency at the bank. There is a posted rate
| that I can get online. If I go to the teller, they will propose
| that rate as well, at which point I say "can I have the premium
| rate" and they say, ok, I can give you x - something 1% better or
| so.
|
| Point is, I'm not negotiating with the bank teller, they have a
| flow chart they need to follow. For a lot of positions with big
| companies, it's going to be the same. There might be a path on
| the flowchart you can access, but you're not really negotiating.
| In some cases you may be able to break though this if there's a
| real person (not recruiter) that will push for you, but talking
| to recruiters / talent is like talking to the bank teller.
| dan-robertson wrote:
| So even if you're just advancing down a flow chart, the
| 'negotiation' option is better, right?
| brunooliv wrote:
| In my experience this never worked for me for the simple fact
| that I never had the skill and time to even GET a second offer to
| bargain against. I wouldn't say I'm a bad developer, but I'm
| definitely horrible at interviewing and having to jump through
| several different steps at different companies just to bargain
| for a higher end of the range makes me feel like either the
| market is the problem or the expectations from companies are way
| unrealistic
| dan-robertson wrote:
| I think expectations are often realistic in the sense that
| companies are generally able to hire sufficiently many people
| at acceptable prices. But I think it's also the case that there
| are fashions in interviewing such that companies are mostly all
| trying to hire the same subset of candidates that do well at
| the current thing. So if you're bad at the current style of
| interviewing it's going to be more work than someone fortunate
| enough to do well at the current fad.
| 3eb7988a1663 wrote:
| I too have never been in situation where the timing would
| possibly work out to get companies to compete. Some employers
| take months from start to finish while others can wrap things
| up within two weeks. Then you get an offer that requires a
| decision within two-three days.
|
| Sure, make an ask for more money, but I have never had any
| leverage.
| ashdksnndck wrote:
| I found that behavior would change a lot once I had an offer
| from a decent company. Suddenly all the scheduling/matching
| delays and processes that supposedly were delaying me would
| be resolved when I revealed that. It was even worth emailing
| recruiters that ghosted me because they would respond again.
| Also, offer deadlines are usually just pressure tactics and
| would go away if there actually was a risk of me not signing.
|
| Caveat that I haven't interviewed in the last couple years
| and this may not be the case anymore.
| beefnugs wrote:
| The whole definition of a regular joe employee is that they are
| working under a coercion hierarchy. There are no negotiations,
| either you got luck shifted into a shitrole or they go onto the
| next 20 options.
|
| The only way this will ever move in the direction of the employee
| is if some drastic change happens where more independence and
| negotiation is an ongoing part of employment. Unless things are
| so open to negotiation that someone can go "hey i am a little
| burned out, but I don't want to hurt the company how about this
| year i work 50% for 60% compensation" And there is meaningful
| negotiation without immediate threats of replacement.
| giantg2 wrote:
| I might lose my job very soon. I assume I won't be able to
| negotiate salary at my new job... if I get a new job. I assume I
| will end up with a big pay cut in this market.
| snowwrestler wrote:
| Is this out of date in a few little ways now?
|
| He says the hiring market for engineers is hot... is it? Maybe
| for certain rare species of AI specialists, but for anyone else
| the going looks a good bit tougher now than it did even a couple
| years ago.
|
| Also, he spends a fair bit of time encouraging people not to
| reveal their former salary, but in all but a few rare cases your
| former salary is available to your new employer via data sharing
| service providers. The HR team at my employer now asks applicants
| for their former salary strictly as a test of their honesty. And
| yes, have kicked competitive candidates out for giving a false
| number. Declining to give the number is fine, but does not create
| any negotiating advantage.
| ashdksnndck wrote:
| They can find out your salary, but they won't know your stock,
| which has much higher variance for software engineers.
| Joel_Mckay wrote:
| Best method:
|
| 1. Get another job someplace more progressive
|
| 2. Make sure they phone your employer for a reference
|
| 3. Explain to current employer salary package is insufficient,
| and you are cutting back your available hours
|
| 4. Leave if they argue over something as silly as heavily taxed
| income
|
| By the time people have to have this conversation, there is
| already a serious problem in the corporate culture.
|
| Tech people usually must eventually leave if they want a better
| position. =3
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-22 23:00 UTC)